Saturday, September 29, 2012

... but Berardelli put out zilch to anybody interested in the outcome of the Gallo-Akselrod Independence Party write-in primary case in Brooklyn Supreme Court.

The relative importance of pivot-points for Gallo would be weighted toward his getting the Independence line in his court case, rather than having a good fundraiser. Berardelli obviously has a bigger hand in the former than the latter, so one wonders why he's keeping his light under a bushel basket.

Of course, getting the Independence line and having a good fundraiser are not mutually exclusive. However, if Conservative-Republican candidate Russell Gallo is going to have a real shot at a competitive race against Democratic Assemblyman Steve Cymbrowitz, he'll need to win his case to overturn the Independence Party primary win by Ben Akselrod and raise sufficient funds to go forward against Cymbrowitz. The Gallo team put a real effort into its losing opportunity to ballot primary to take the Independence line away from Akselrod, who in turn narrowly lost his Democratic primary to Cymbrowitz. For Gallo's loss in the Independence Party write-in primary to be upheld by the court would be devastating.

If Akselrod holds the Independence line through Gallo's last ditch court challenges, the buzz is that several social conservative Republicans will be pitching a Storobin-Akselrod ticket in their common EDs.

btw, "The question begs...": if things were going well for the Gallo-Berardelli team in court, wouldn't Berardelli be kvelling more about that and not so much about Gallo's fundraiser?

Friday, September 28, 2012

Is the COVER UP being covered up some more --- or is it becoming a bigger BLOW UP

According to Reuters, “a top U.S. intelligence authority issued an unusual public statement” today — The Office of Director of National Intelligence has declared that it now believes the September 11th attack on U.S. diplomatic facilities in Benghazi was a "deliberate and organized terrorist attack."

A statement, by the office of Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, officially announced that it had changed the U.S. intelligence assessment of how and why the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi had occurred. During the attacks on two U.S. government compounds in that eastern Libyan city, four U.S. citizens performing various functions on behalf of the U.S., including the U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens, were killed.

According to a spokesman for Clapper's office: 1) in the immediate aftermath of the attack, U.S. agencies came to a view that the Benghazi attack had begun spontaneously following protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and those demonstrations appeared to be directed against a short film made in California lampooning the Prophet Mohammad; 2) then, as U.S. intelligence subsequently learned more about the attack, "We revised our initial assessment to reflect new information indicating that it was a deliberate and organized terrorist attack carried out by extremists”; however 3) although it remains "unclear" if any individual or specific group orchestrated the attack, U.S. agencies nonetheless do say that some of the militants involved in the attack were "linked to groups affiliated with, or sympathetic to al-Qaeda."

Reporting a little earlier today, a CNN report by Suzanne Kelly had the following take on the same statement from The Office of Director of National Intelligence:

“In an unusual statement released Friday, the U.S. intelligence community is seeking to explain how it has revised its assessment of the attack on the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya.... It has moved from an initial assessment of the September 11 attack as something that began spontaneously following a protest over anti-Muslim film to the current belief that it was "a deliberate and organized terrorist assault carried out by extremists" affiliated or sympathetic with al Qaeda.... The statement represents the fullest accounting yet of the intelligence community's changed understanding of the attack, and suggests it is trying to distance itself from the political debate over whether the Obama administration is being fully forthcoming about its understanding of events.”

Suzanne Kelly notes that The Office of Director of National Intelligence specifically mentioned that its earlier assessment, which had been provided to the White House and appropriate Members of Congress, was at the time specifically characterized as preliminary and subject to change. CNN’s Kelly also noted that today’s statement by the ODNI didn’t contain a specific time line as to when the various assessments and re-assessments were completed and/or provided to the White House and other Executive agencies.

Phone banks were operated out of Election Headquarters of NYS Senator Martin Golden; the McCarthy Robo-calls were recordings of Golden, who identified himself as a State Senator and urged a vote in the Republican primary for McCarthy.

Thomas A. McCarthy’s filings showed no expenditures for either phone banks or robo-calls; neither did they show any specific donations for/of those very valuable pre-primary services. A review of the New York State Board of Elections Financial Disclosure data base showed the following schedules had been filed by or on behalf of Thomas A. McCarthy, now the Republican and Conservative candidate running for the assembly in the 46th AD: the 10-day post-primary: Schedule "A" “Contributions”; the 10-day post-primary Schedule "C" “Other Monetary”; Schedule "F" “Expenditures/Payments”; and a “TOM MCCARTHY FOR ASSEMBLY 2012 10 Day Post Primary Report Summary Page.”

Even thought the 10-day post-primary disclosures made by or on behalf of candidate Tom McCarthy did not reflect any phone expenses or show that there were any phone bank and/or robo-call operations in his primary campaign, there were multiple instances indicating the existence of those very operations in the final days of McCarthy’s primary campaign against conservative Republican Lucretia Regina-Potter. That phone banks were operated out of Election Headquarters of NYS Senator Martin Golden was confirmed during a conversation with a “volunteer” who worked at Golden Headquarters, who is actively supporting both McCarthy and Golden.

The who, what, where, how and how-much of McCarthy’s pre-primary phone operations are still being pursued at the NYS BOE and from other sources.

Hillary Clinton tells UN meeting on North African security that 9/11 attack on Libyan Consulate is evidence that extremist groups – including an Al Qaeda affiliate – are capable of causing havoc in the region.

According to a report in the “Christian Science Monitor,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton indicated for the first time on Wednesday that there had been a link between al-Qaida operatives in North Africa and the 9/11/12 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Libya that resulted in the deaths of four Americans, including the U.S. Ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevens.

Clinton said that, "What is happening inside Mali is augmented by the rising threat from violent extremism across the region.” She added that groups including al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb have launched attacks from northern Mali into neighboring countries; and that the same groups “are working with other violent extremists to undermine the democratic transitions underway in North Africa, as we tragically saw in Benghazi.”

Howard LaFranchi, a staff writer for the CSM, said that the Secretary of State Clinton went further in asserting that the September 11th attack on the US consulate in Benghazi, Libya involved terrorists, including the mention of an al–Qaida connection, than any other Obama administration official had previously gone. The Secretary of State’s remarks were an amplification of what had been reported previously by the head of the U.S. National Counterterrorism Center, Matthew Olsen, in congressional testimony last week. However, his testimony was only that information >>> suggested <<< those involved in the attack might have had some level of contact with Al Qaeda and its affiliates – in particular, Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM).

Wednesday, September 26, 2012

Is it all simple and straight forward ? Or, is it all about y/k/w from Bay Ridge?

It’s been months since there has been a blogcast on “Brooklyn GOP [blog] Radio” and weeks since there has been a posting on the “Brooklyn GOP Radio - Official - Show Blog”. Even the sidebar tweets of Russell C. Gallo and Gene R. Berardelli have been minimal. This is indeed very strange, because Kings County Republican Leader Craig Eaton had repeatedly extolled the “...GOP Radio...” stuff as a major part of a perceived Republican renaissance in Southwest Brooklyn.

I am getting conflicting reports from my field operatives. One or two (one more so than the other) have said that Russell Gallo is completely invested, time-wise, in his campaign for the Assembly against Democrat incumbent Assemblyman Steve Cymbrowitz; another, who only occasionally looks in on things in the 45th AD, says Gallo is all mopes, frowns and rages. Of course, both can be correct vis a vis Gallo and his campaign (depending when you’re bumping-into or not-bumping-into Mr. Gallo), but the two differing scenarios can make all the difference in the world explaining Gallo’s absence from the “...GOP Radio...” stuff.

The Gene R. Berardelli front is a little tougher to figure out. After all, both of the “...GOP Radio...” things are his babies. The leading theories from those NOT in a position to know, except by limited casual contact, are as follows: a) the burn-out theory, Gene B. worked too hard doing almost everything for more than six months for Craig Eaton’s branch of the Brooklyn GOP, and as a result, Berardelli is played out [the modified version is that, in addition to that, he owes his day job a lot of work]; b) Berardelli is spending all his spare time working on the Gallo campaign; and c) there are ongoing personal matters that require a lot of Gene B’s attention. I think it is very likely that it’s an “all of the above” scenario – plus a possible “wet blanket” being applied by the “Bay Ridge Cabal” for the benefit of y/k/w.

One of the old hands with a firm grip on the leash of the Brooklyn GOP, who likes to yank it hard with some frequency, thinks all of the insider GOP blogging, for and against Eaton, etc., is a big waste of time, effort and money. He is known to have the ear of y/k/w; and for some time now, what y/k/w says — goes.

Local 1199 SEIU gives its endorsement to "Conservative/Republican" Golden over Democrat in race for "targeted" NYS Senate seat in Brooklyn

Today State Senator Martin Golden received support in his hotly contested re-election bid from one of the most left-leaning unions in the State of New York, S.E.I.U., Local 1199. That fact alone should give anybody who has conservative Republican or what lately have been called “Tea Party” sensibilities real pause to wonder what is going on with a State Senator that holds himself out as a conservative and a Republican. In that regard, Martin Golden’s response to the news of that endorsement is even more troubling.

According to YNN’s Capital Tonight Golden made the following statement after the SEIU Local 1199's endorsement:

“I am proud to have 1199 SEIU’s endorsement. Their mission is to improve and expand quality patient care and to protect and improve the lives of those suffering from illnesses and infirmities. I have fought tirelessly for legislation to promote and aid the membership of 1199 SEIU in providing a higher level of health care support for all New Yorkers, and will continue to work to make our communities a better place to live, work, and raise a family.” ( ...://capitaltonightny.ynn.com/2012/09/golden-nets-1199-seiu-endorsement/...)

The SEIU announcement is the latest of several union endorsements for the so-called “conservative Republican” state senator. Prior to the SEIU, the most notable endorsement for Golden had been the Hotel Trades Council. Golden has also been endorsed by collection of trades groups, uniformed services unions in NYS and other small chapters/locals of larger of public and private sector labor organizations.

In the 2010 election cycle, independent Republicans had charged that State Senator Golden (R,C) was a R.I.N.O. (Republican in name only), who had a pro-union voting record quite similar to local Democrats like Assemblyman Peter Abbate and State Senator Diane Savino (both of whom openly trumpeted their pro-unionist advocacy in Albany). Apparently, nothing has changed since then, except that State Senator Golden has had to work harder to keep the unions on his side.

In light of the fact that for the first time in a very long time Golden’s opponent, Andrew Gounardes, has garnered substantial union support of his own, Conservatives and Republicans have to ask what specific commitments State Senator Golden had to make in order to secure this particular SEIU endorsement, as well as all the support that he'd gotten already from the other unions.

Tuesday, September 25, 2012

According to “Politicker” Scribe: State Senator Golden Claimed “Extra Credit” for Equal Pay Bill, but Democratic Opponent, Andrew Gounardes, corrected the record very quickly.

Sometimes State Senator Martin Golden is like the Brooklyn Republican Party’s very own Joe Biden. Brooklyn Republicans and Conservatives, like party chairmen Gerry Kassar and Craig Eaton, never know what Golden is going to say next, or what they’ll have to do to walk back the Silver-haired Golden’s most recent gaffe.

This time, GOP State Senator Marty Golden's gaffe didn't sound very conservative at all. And it was the Golden Campaign team that was johnny-on-the-spot trying to sort things out; but not before the Gounardes Campaign team caught the State Senator off base on a false claim of co-sponsorship of a bill that made it into law.

It was reported by Colin Campbell that State Senator Martin Golden had written in a recent campaign mailing that “Beverly Neufeld, President of the New York Women’s Agenda and Director of the Equal Pay Coalition, called legislation >>> that I co-sponsored, <<< ‘…a welcome accomplishment for Equal Pay advocates and women across New York’.... The Women’s Workforce Bill is now law and is the first piece of State legislation that acknowledges and addresses the gender wage gap. It will not be the last.”

Ms. Neufeld seems to be a very liberal-sounding woman; and our State Senator's ultimate line that "It will not be the last [piece of state legislation]” sounds quite ominous. Let's leave that for later on.

Acording to Colin Campbell writing on the Politicker blog, Mr. Golden’s Democratic Party opponent, Andrew Gounardes, pointed out that Mr. Golden was not among the co-sponsors of the bill, which did pass the State Senate unanimously. Mr. Gounardes’ press statement added insult to injury by connecting State Senator Golden’s false claim of co-sponsorship of the recently-passed “Women’s Workforce Bill” with Golden’s earlier vote against the “New York Fair Pay Act” in 2011. — And, of course, lest anybody forget, the Andrew Gounardes release also reminded everybody about Golden’s now-infamous government-paid mailer promoting something described as a “feminine presence” class, which had been cancelled by Golden without explanation, when the “class” or “seminar” scheduled at Golden’s family’s Bay Ridge Manor was threatened by protests.

According to Colin Campbell, “When they were asked about the mailing, Mr. Golden’s campaign said it was a simple error, and not exactly a big deal.” In a statement to Politicker. Golden’s people said “The statement in the letter was in error, but does not diminish the fact that the Senator did strongly advocate for its passage and voted for it.” And in a remark completely in character for their boss — “.... [G]iven the opportunity again, he would do so [wait a minute: would he a) falsely claim co-sponsorship for the bill again; b) vote for the bill again; or c) actually co-sponsor the bill for the first time on the second try?] .”

Btw, as a commentator for conservative Republicans, I’d like to know exactly what other “piece[s] of state legislation that acknowledge[ ] and address[ ] the gender wage gap” is State Senator Martin Golden planning to co-sponsor or back in any way? In line with that, “given the opportunity,” would the venerable state senator have reversed his 2011 position on the “New York Fair Pay Act”?

Current daily tracking polls show race even

by Galewyn Massey

It is being reported that the raw data accumulated by pollsters prior to various statistical adjustments and modeling done by the various polling organizations shows that the actual responders to the pollsters would consistently favor Republican Candidate Mitt Romney over President Barack Obama by huge margins well beyond the margin of error if they applied the same adjustments and modeling based upon the Reagan-Carter election instead of the Obama-McCain race. In fact, Mitt Romney’s margins of victory using the Reagan-Carter model would be far greater than the leads now being attributed by pollsters to Obama using the Obama-McCain model.

According to a 9-24-12 post at the World Net Daily by NYTimes best-selling author, Jerome Corsi, “most of the major polls reported by establishment media are ‘skewed’ in favor of the Democratic Party and incumbent Barack Obama.” He continues, by citing the work of UnskewedPoll.com, which indicates that “... a true gauge of the presidential race, based on more realistic models, shows Republican challenger Mitt Romney leading by an average of nearly eight points.”

Meanwhile, the daily tracking polls show the Obama-Romney race as virtually even and/or very close and within the margin of error.

The latest Rasmussen Reports tracking poll has President Obama ahead by only 1% in the polling that was released earlier today, Tuesday, September 25, 2012. Barack Obama was at 47% compared to 46% for Mitt Romney. Third party candidates were noted at 3%, combined, while undecided voters were put at 4%. When so-called "leaners" are included in the Rasmussen numbers, it results in a statistical tie with both Barack Obama and Mitt Romney shown at 47% (after October 1st, Rasmussen automatically will include the "leaners" as part of its everyday polling total).

Yesterday, the Gallup poll numbers remained unchanged for the second consecutive day, with President Obama at 48% compared to 46% for Mitt Romney (within the margin of error). In that poll, third party candidates and undecided voters combined were at 6% nationwide. The Gallup poll was released yesterday afternoon, Monday, September 24, 2012.

About Me

I formerly have commented on various political blogs concerning Republican politics. Although the focus of my political commentary has been on the Brooklyn GOP and other aspects of politics in Brooklyn, I have also posted commentary about national matters.
If you wish to contact Galewyn Massey directly, please, Email to galewynmasban@gmail.com